Thread: Veritas Cap iron for Stanley planes - have I got a bad one?

Dan, it is not necessarily the Veritas chip breaker. It is more likely that this particular Stanley uses a chip breaker that is different to the Veritas one. I have experienced this on a number of occasions with a variety of planes.

I would not file the slot on the Veritas - it will lead to a large amount of backlash when adjusting the depth of cut. Rather, try a few other chip breakers and see if they fit better - I have had to do this as well. On one Stanley, I found the LN worked better. Unfortunately, I do not have any spare #4 chip breakers, otherwise I would let you try one for size.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Originally Posted by derekcohen

Dan, it is not necessarily the Veritas chip breaker. It is more likely that this particular Stanley uses a chip breaker that is different to the Veritas one. I have experienced this on a number of occasions with a variety of planes.

I would not file the slot on the Veritas - it will lead to a large amount of backlash when adjusting the depth of cut. Rather, try a few other chip breakers and see if they fit better - I have had to do this as well. On one Stanley, I found the LN worked better. Unfortunately, I do not have any spare #4 chip breakers, otherwise I would let you try one for size.

Regards from Perth

Derek

No worries Derek, thanks for commenting! I'll go back to using the Stanley chip breakers for the time being and might try out the LN ones too.

I found that I had to use like with like, eg Stanley bladed with Stanley Chipbreakers.

I don't have a Veritas version but Stanley, Record, Lie Nielson and Hock.

Totally non scientific, but it's what became apparent to me.

Hi Dan,

FWIW my Stanley 4 1/2 that you used at Derek's place has the original Stanley cap iron. You saw how Derek fettled it by adding the 50 degree angle to the leading edge and recommended a slight adjustment to the 'spring'. It works very well now.

Thanks,
Zac.

Dan, I'm confused even after reading your post twice. You say it ".. always sat very far forward towards the front of the mouth, far more than when I used a normal chip breaker...." But the business end should be the in the same position relative to the edge of the blade whatever CB you use? The distance from the edge of the cam slot to the edge of the cap-iron is the critical factor for sure, and 3mm can certainly make a huge difference, as I discovered the first time I made a CB & got the slot in the wrong spot. It can make the difference between having the thumbwheel screwed hard against the frog to retract the blade for a sensible cut (distance is too great), or having the thumbwheel fall off its stud before you get enough blade exposure to cut (too short).

There is really no cure for a mis-matched cap-iron. Filing the cam slot longer is definitely not advisable! If the slot were a greater distance from where it is, you could make a new one at the correct point, but 3mm won't give you enough meat to fit a new slot in without breaking into the old one. Making a new cap-iron (not that difficult, even if you have no prior metal-working experience), or finding a properly-matching one is your best bet.

A heavier cap-iron can improve a plane's function a little, but imo, maybe not as much as is sometimes touted. A 'proper' old Stanley cap-iron is a perfectly functional thing as long as it is fitting properly. I will admit that I've taken to making cap-irons from 2.5mm stainless steel the last couple of years (originals are about 1.6-1.75mm thick), partly because you get a half-turn or so more thread for the screw (seen quite a few old C-Is with stripped screw-holes). The main advantage of the SS to me is that it's easier to keep clean & polished, which helps the shavings to slide up & over the nose of the cap-iron freely.

Cheers,

Originally Posted by IanW

Dan, I'm confused even after reading your post twice. You say it ".. always sat very far forward towards the front of the mouth, far more than when I used a normal chip breaker...." But the business end should be the in the same position relative to the edge of the blade whatever CB you use? The distance from the edge of the cam slot to the edge of the cap-iron is the critical factor for sure, and 3mm can certainly make a huge difference, as I discovered the first time I made a CB & got the slot in the wrong spot. It can make the difference between having the thumbwheel screwed hard against the frog to retract the blade for a sensible cut (distance is too great), or having the thumbwheel fall off its stud before you get enough blade exposure to cut (too short).

There is really no cure for a mis-matched cap-iron. Filing the cam slot longer is definitely not advisable! If the slot were a greater distance from where it is, you could make a new one at the correct point, but 3mm won't give you enough meat to fit a new slot in without breaking into the old one. Making a new cap-iron (not that difficult, even if you have no prior metal-working experience), or finding a properly-matching one is your best bet.

A heavier cap-iron can improve a plane's function a little, but imo, maybe not as much as is sometimes touted. A 'proper' old Stanley cap-iron is a perfectly functional thing as long as it is fitting properly. I will admit that I've taken to making cap-irons from 2.5mm stainless steel the last couple of years (originals are about 1.6-1.75mm thick), partly because you get a half-turn or so more thread for the screw (seen quite a few old C-Is with stripped screw-holes). The main advantage of the SS to me is that it's easier to keep clean & polished, which helps the shavings to slide up & over the nose of the cap-iron freely.

Cheers,

Sorry my explanation wasn't great. I'm setting the blade back from chip breaker the same distance as always (0.5-1mm) but because the cam slot is closer to the mouth I can't get a good adjustment range on the wheel. With it backed off all the way there's actually the slightest part of the blade protruding. And if I increase the depth of cut it agressively it actually comes very close to hitting the front of the mouth opening.

Tried a combination of Stanley and Veritas blades with this chip breaker on a #4 and #5, can't get any combination working. Can get the same planes working beautifully with the original blades and chip breakers.

Ah well, will just have to get better at using the original hardware. People have been getting by just fine with them for years.

Originally Posted by bueller

No worries Derek, thanks for commenting! I'll go back to using the Stanley chip breakers for the time being and might try out the LN ones too.

it may not be a popular view, but the stanley stock cap iron is a better design. I'd stick with it.

There are people who will say that same thing because they believe nothing new is good, but I'm not one of those people.

it is popular to get a dud stanley or other older or newer copy of the same design that doesn't seal right, though - either due to bad geometry or because it's been abused.

Originally Posted by IanW

A heavier cap-iron can improve a plane's function a little, but imo, maybe not as much as is sometimes touted. A 'proper' old Stanley cap-iron is a perfectly functional thing as long as it is fitting properly.

Cheers,

Agreed. It's not a matter of function that's improved in heavier planes. Proper use of the cap itself makes the plane stable in the cut (even if a stanley iron can chatter like crazy with the cap set far off - once the cut is controlled, that stops).

What actually happens with the heavier irons is that they mask what you're feeling - as in, bits of imperfection in whats going on will be transmitted to you just like they are in a lightweight car. But they may not be transmitted to you in a heavier plane (I noticed several years ago when testing all kinds of cap irons before writing articles or selecting angles that I'd suggest that the LN plane will plane and leave tearout that you can't feel whereas the same surface quality is noticeable in a stanley).